Although we may no longer have any followers due to our very long delay, this blog will be an attempt to get the ball rolling again. This article first appeared in NWC's newspaper The Column on Feb. 26, 2009. Thanks for all who have not left us!
Complementarians and the Issue of Competence
In the Column’s recent issue outlining the gender debate on campus, there were some comments made by complementarian students that ought to be corrected. When asked what position they hold, they said something like, “I am complementarian because God made men and women different, and each gender is better at different things.” Although not completely incorrect, this comment implies that men have roles that women can’t fulfill (and vice versa) because a certain level of competence exists in that area. But is this really the case? I think the student in favor of egalitarianism maintained much better logic when she argued, “Men and women can do the same exact things, and sometimes women can do the task and jobs better than men.” In terms of competence, she’s exactly right! But is competency really the issue?
I have been married now for just over 2 years and continually see how incompetent I am in comparison to my wife. For example, she will meet a person one time and never forget their name. I really struggle with names. If a pastoral search committee wanted an extroverted individual who was more competent at remembering every church members name, my wife would be a better choice than I would. Likewise, there are many women, like Nancy Pearcey and Elizabeth Elliot for instance, who may be more competent at speaking and writing than their husbands. Shouldn’t competent women, like these, at least join their husbands in pastoral ministry?
Good biblical research will find that the Bible never speaks on competence as the reason for gender complementarity. When Paul writes to Timothy under the context of church leadership, “I do not permit a woman to teach or to exercise authority over a man,” he roots his reasoning in the creation account, “For Adam was formed first, then Eve” (1 Timothy 2:12-13). Note that Paul does not say, “For Adam, and all men, are better than women at leading people.”
Paul writes what he does in 1 Timothy not because of any supposed level of competence, but with the knowledge that God created men and women to joyfully complement one another for His glory. Eph. 5 reveals that husbands are to “love their wives, as Christ loved church” (v. 25) and women ought to submit to their husbands “as to the Lord” (v. 22, 24). He then goes on to write of this “mystery” (a hidden plan that God has now revealed) as “profound, and I am saying that it refers to Christ and the church” (v. 32).
He is pointing out that the union between husband and wife was created by God as a reflection of the relationship between Christ and the church. In other words, the roles of men and women have nothing to do with competence in as much as obedience to God, so that in our marriages and church life, we might be a living reflection of the Gospel.
The question still lingers, however, if the issue is not competence, how are we different? Say, for example, Freddy and his wife, Carly, are asleep in their king-sized bed when they hear a loud noise in their house. Now, Carly is a black-belt in karate and Freddy is not so coordinated. Should he passively let her search the house since she’s more competent? Or should he protect her as Christ protects the church despite his lack of coordination?
This is a measly attempt to do justice to the reality of God’s creation. But here’s the point: God’s plans for His creation are never based upon the competence of an individual. Rather, he works through incompetent fishermen, tax collectors, and even introverts to accomplish His will (1 Cor. 1:26-31). I pray that we all step out of our anthropocentric, competence-centered mindset to see that the gender debate is not so much about boundaries as it is about God’s creatures functioning as obedient vessels for His glory.
Zach Tarter
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
4 comments:
Paul's comments to Timothy regarding gender roles in 1st Timothy were in regards to a specific issue at the church in Ephesus. It seems that taking his statement and applying it to all situations throughout all time is a bit presumptuous.
Thanks for the comment...I can't believe that we still have readers!
While I agree that Paul wrote 1 Timothy specifically to the church at Ephesus regarding a particular issue, one ought to recognize that he roots his argument in the creation account, “For Adam was formed first, then Eve” (v. 13). I do not think this text allows for differing interpretations without a particular methodological assumption guiding one's approach to the text. In other words, unless one assumes that Paul's words are so bound by time that even his use of the creation account is informed by surrounding culture, then I think the plain teaching of Scripture must be taken as applicable today. So in one sense, I am being presumptuous in believing that Paul's theology (of the creation account in this case) is more bound by Spirit-led revelation than any specific cultural or congregational issues. Of course (in my opinion) the other side also seems to be presumptuous in holding that Paul's use of the creation account is more to defend the cultural or time bound issue of women preaching than to give a theology that transcends time (I do not want to misread you, so please correct me if I am!).
At the end of the day, it appears that we are all presumptuous with the biblical text in some way, shape, or form. I think perhaps the question we ought to ask is whether or not our presumptions are indeed in line with the plain meaning of Scripture.
I hope this helps! Thanks again for the comment!
Zach
Maybe an important question to ask anonymous is, "Would Paul have addressed the same issue in a different church the same way?" The context of God's Word,
(and with all do respect Zach, it is God's Word, which I think you would agree with, not Paul's theology. Verse 6 & 7, "Who gave Himself (Christ) for all, to be testified in due time. Whereunto I am ordained a preacher, and an apostle, (I speak the truth in Christ , and lie not;) a teacher of the Gentiles in faith and verity." Theology is man's interpretation of scripture, Paul yet a man, but he was an apostle, preacher and teacher, a sent one to the Gentiles in faith and verity. He wrote God's Word, not a theology or system about Scripture.)
in 1 Timothy is how all Christians are to operate in the local assembly as a corporate member of the Body of Christ. As noted above Paul is not only teaching the church at Ephesus, but what that church is apart of, which is the church the Body of Christ, consisting of Jew and Gentile, mainly Gentiles. Paul is teaching all Gentiles as easily seen in this verse. In that operation there is an authority that God has set forth. In the order of authority between men and women their are different roles, women are to learn in silence with all subjection (v. 11). Women due to the fact of the created order and of the example of creation as Zach has mentioned and to the fact of God's clear Word are to learn in silence and willfully subject themselves to the authority set forth in the church. The woman is also not to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man, but to be in silence (v.12). So the woman in the local assembly although equal to the man in the church the Body of Christ has a different role(s) then men. She is to learn in silence and not to teach or usurp authority over the man in silence. This of course is not that a woman is not to teach at all, just not over a man, which the following verses and chapters of 1 Timothy reveal.
Why?
God's created order first (v. 13), God created man first and then Eve, the woman. It is not as though because Eve sinned first (v. 14) that she some how lost the role to teach and preach over a man, she never had the role to teach and preach over the man in the first place. This is God's creative genius, not a plight to cast down women. God created man first and that is truth. Woman was created to be man's help and she is meet to do so, that is her role. Women have huge roles within the local assembly. Both men and women are equal, yet have differing roles and both are to embrace those roles in gratitude and in all subjection to God, that the work of ministry and the edifying of the Body of Christ is accomplished so that we all come to the unity of the faith, unto a perfect man, unto the measure of the stature of the fulness of Christ. Our prime objective in any role is this that we may be able to measure the stature of the fulness of Christ, God's manifold wisdom for all time in His Son the Lord Jesus Christ.
The truth is anonymous Paul would have addressed any issue of gender roles within the local assembly in this way, because the specific issue is that of how men and women are to operate in the local assembly of the corporate Body of Christ, not just at Ephesus. In love, your brother in Christ.
Brother in the Lord,
Your question, "Would Paul have addressed the same issue in a different church the same way?" is a viable question to ask and certainly must be addressed. I agree with you that Paul would write this to every local church he ministered to because of his recognition of God’s plan for manhood and womanhood.
We see in Scripture that Paul wrote of biblical manhood and womanhood to others than the Ephesians. He wrote, for example, to the Cretans (Titus 2:1-8) in the context of the local assembly, as well as to the church at Colossae in regard to marriage (Colossians 3:18). Peter also wrote of marital roles and attitudes to dispersed believers in 1 Peter 3:1-7. Thus, as you mentioned, Paul would have wrote what he did to any church if the situation called for it. Biblical manhood and womanhood is rooted in God’s creation and is most certainly “God’s creative genius” and so I thank you for taking your time to write of this.
I apologize if I seemed to make Paul’s words out to be a man-made theology. When I wrote of “Paul's theology” I was simply alluding to Paul’s understanding and proclamation of Truth as revealed in the creation account. My thought was that theology literally means “the study of God,” and so when Paul or anyone writes of God they are showing their theology. Of course, Paul’s theology also happens to be the Word of God, whereas our theology is fallible. Thanks again!
Zach
Post a Comment